Decoy or fishing lure exhibiting realistic spectral reflectance

ABSTRACT

An animal decoy or fishing lure with a surface reflection which closely matches the spectral reflectance pattern of the animal that it is designed to mimic, including both human-visible and ultraviolet wavelengths, with the intent of making the decoy or fishing lure appear more realistic to animals that can see in both the human-visible and ultraviolet spectrums.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED PATENT APPLICATIONS

The present application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. applicationSer. No. 11/711,409, entitled “Decoy exhibiting realistic spectralreflectance”, filed on Feb. 27, 2007, and is also a continuation-in-partof U.S. application Ser. No. 11/711,410, entitled “Method for creating adecoy exhibiting realistic spectral reflectance”, filed on Feb. 27,2007, both of which claim priority to U.S. Provisional PatentApplication No. 60/777,256, entitled, “Spectrally matched devices andcoatings,” and filed on Feb. 27, 2006.

FIELD OF INVENTION

This invention relates to decoys and other replicates of animals usedfor hunting, for attraction of animals, as lures for the specificpurpose of catching fish, or for other purposes. In particular, thisinvention involves a decoy or fishing lure having a surface reflectancethat is matched to the light reflection of the animal it is intended tomimic, including ultraviolet wavelengths.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Decoys are commonly used for the hunting and fishing of animals such asgame fish, waterfowl, turkeys, doves, deer, antelope and many otheranimals. The purpose of a decoy is to mimic the appearance of an animalin order to attract animals, or for the purpose of deceiving animals toelicit a desired behavior. Artificial lures designed to mimic thegeneral or specific form, coloration, patterning, sound or movement ofbait fish and other animal prey of game fish are considered “decoylures” for this application. These decoy lures are sometimes referred toas plugs, hardbaits, crankbaits, minnow lures, shad lures, stickbaits,jerkbaits, soft plastics, flies, and various hybrids and other forms ofartificial lures. Other fishing lures exist that do not meet thedefinition of decoys or decoy lures, but instead are unnaturally shaped,patterned, or colored artificial lures designed to be highly visible andto illicit a predation response from game fish. These non-decoyartificial lures often have unnatural forms such as spoons, spinnerbaits, some jigs and other artificial lures that bare little or nonatural resemblance to a particular animal. Non-decoy artificial luresutilize a game fish's instinctive predation responses, while decoy-luresalso utilize a game fish's conditioned experiences successfully eatingreal bait fish and other prey. The term “decoy lure” is not a commonindustry term and is used in this application to draw the distinctionbetween two generalized approaches to designing fishing lures. While thedesign of the two described types of artificial lures have areas ofoverlap (such as both typically possess hooks, some unnatural formspossess realistic patterning or coloration, and some realistic formspossess unnatural coloration or patterning) the non-decoy lurestypically have stimulating but unnatural flashing, spinning motions,bright colors or attachments while decoy-lures typically resemble ananimal in either form, color, patterning, movement, sound, orcombinations therein. Both types of lures (decoy and non-decoy sodefined) are commonly employed and it cannot be said that one type issuperior to the other. Those skilled in the art of fishing know thateach type of lure is suited for specific situations and species of gamefish.

In the production of decoys and decoy lures, attention is given tomaking the decoy or decoy lure look like the intended animal in order tomake the decoy or decoy lure more effective at attracting game animalsor catching game fish. The color of a decoy is matched to the color ofthe animal using techniques common within the industry. Glare from somebird decoys is reduced using various surface treatment methods. Manyproducts are designed so that motion is induced in the decoy. All ofthese techniques are employed in order to increase the “realism” of thedecoy, as it is well understood that increased realism in decoyscorresponds to higher performance (i.e., a decoy that better attractsthe intended animal). Particular importance is often given to matchingthe coloration and patterning of the decoy lure to the bait fish oranimal it is intended to mimic, such as minnows, shads, herring, smelt,suckers, young game fish, and other fish and animals such as frogs andcrayfish. This appearance matching feature of decoy lures is referred toas “realism” in this application. In the design of lures, and to thespecificity of the present invention, it should be noted the obviousfact that decoy lures possess some attribute(s) of the animal it isintended to mimic and non-decoy lures, by definition, are not tied tonatural forms, coloration or patterning. It is to further the naturalappearance or realism of the coloration, patterning or spectralreflectance of decoys or decoy lures, and therefore the effectiveness ofdecoys and decoy lures that the present invention is intended.

It remains a common misconception even today that most animals are colorblind. For years it was believed that animals had vision systems thatwere more primitive than human's three primary color (trichromatic)vision. Modern research is showing that many primates are trichromaticand most non-mammal animals, including many fish, birds, and even someinvertebrates, have vision systems and color perception far beyondhumans and primates. It has also been confirmed that many animalslimited to two primary colors (dichromatic), often are more perceptiveof blue colors than humans and even see into ultraviolet (UV)wavelengths. Birds and many fish, for instance, are tetrachromatic; thatis, they perceive colors based on a blend of four primary colors. Someanimal species even possess five primary colors. These primary colorsare determined by the animal's cones, which are special cells in theretina of the eye. Humans possess three types of cones, each having peaksensitivity at specific wavelengths: one at the wavelengthscorresponding generally to blue light, one at the wavelengthscorresponding generally to green light, and one at the wavelengthscorresponding generally to red light—hence our blue, green, and redprimary colors. All other colors perceived by humans are the result ofthese cones being stimulated simultaneously (e.g., simultaneous andgenerally similar stimulation of red and green cones causes a human toperceive “yellow”). Birds and many fish generally possess four types ofcones, although this can vary from one species to another and alsothrough genetic mutations. Other animals, some fish, and many mammals,possess only two types of cones, but these cones remain sensitive toultraviolet wavelengths in animals whose ocular media does not blockultraviolet light.

These attribute of having more cone-types than humans and/or having theability to see UV light means that the color and light perception ofmany animals is more precise and discriminating than human colorperception, and many animals (even if they are limited to two types ofcones) are capable of seeing color and light differences that are notapparent to humans.

Critical to creating realism in decoys and decoy lures is theunderstanding of vision and color perception in animals. Recentdevelopments in the science of visual perception in animals hasramifications for decoy and lure manufacturers. The discovery that manyfish and other game animals can perceive UV light has led somemanufacturers in the hunting and fishing industries to develop decoysand lures and lure coatings in an attempt to exploit this discovery(most manufacturers of decoys and fishing lures, however, remain unawareof recent scientific developments or are unaware how these developmentscan be utilized).

Those manufacturers of decoys that have attempted to adapt theirproducts to recent discoveries in animal color perception have notunderstood the science correctly and have not made the conceptual leapnecessary to understand the fundamental differences in color perceptionbetween species. The best example, and one of the most applicable to thepresent invention, is the development of UV absorbing sprays for use oncamouflage and decoys, and the marketing of UV absorbing paints, inksand coatings on decoys. Inventors and manufactures of these productshave learned that birds and other game animals can see UV light and haveconcluded, incorrectly, that UV light is “man-made” and “bad” and mustbe eliminated from hunting products lest the game animals see the decoysor camouflage for what they are. UV light has been described as havingan “eerie glow” that frightens game animals away or a kind of invisible“glare” that must be covered up. A product called Fool-A-Bird™originating from US patent application 20060117637 by Jeckle describes atemporary coating that absorbs UV light designed to be used forwaterfowl decoys, camouflage, and hunting blinds. Also, a product calledU-V-Killer™ from Atsko, Inc. is marketed to hunters for the purpose ofeliminating blue fluorescence from camouflage clothing and other huntingproducts. U-V-Killer™ is sometimes incorrectly interpreted as intendedto eliminate UV reflection (perhaps because the UV-powered “glow” offluorescence is often mistakenly believed to be UV reflection). Themisinterpretation of products such as U-V-Killer™ and the marketingclaims of products like Fool-A-Bird™ contribute to the incorrect beliefin many parts of the hunting community that UV reflection is “bad” andshould be eliminated.

Some fishing lures have been marketed with the purported ability toreflect or emit UV light to be more visible to the fish, especially atdeeper depths. These fishing lures, however, do not teach whether UVshould be absorbed or reflected, or whether it is “good” or “bad” onhunting products. It is well known that non-decoy fishing lures cansometimes be rendered more effective by making them more visible, morecolorful, and even shinier—depending on the fishing circumstances. Thisart does not teach the natural UV reflection level and pattern of baitfish, only that generic UV reflection can make lures more visible tofish. This art also does not teach how to determine the natural UVreflection of bait fish, other game animals, or natural objects. Theinventors have also determined that some of the fishing lures marketedas UV reflecting are actually fluorescent and not UV reflecting.

US patent application 20060121166 by Jeckle describes a temporarycoating that reflects UV light designed to be used on artificial luresand live baits. Jeckle teaches that the application of said temporarycoating increases the visibility and attractiveness of the lure or bait.Similarly, fluorescent and phosphorescent colored lures and lure paintsare designed to increase the visibility and attractiveness of lures andare commonly used in fishing lures (U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,935,659, 4,803,793,4,823,502, 5,063,703, 5,490,344, 6,286,246, 6,748,693, 7,216,455,7,260,913). Yutaka, et. al. in the abstract of JP2002238403 describes alure coated with a UV reflecting coating to increase the conspicuousnessof the lure. What Jeckle and Yutaka et. al. do not appear to recognizeis that UV reflection has been a common property of many fishing luressince the introduction of polished metals or embossed metal foils asmaterials for lures, which dates back at least 80 years. Many metals arehighly UV reflecting and shine in UV in a similar manner to their shinein the human-visible wavelengths. This shine is often angle-dependantand is referred to as specular reflectance, which is different from thenon-angle-dependant diffuse reflectance of most coatings, paints, ormolded-in colors.

Irrespective of Jeckle's or Yutaka et. al.'s awareness (or lack thereof)of UV reflection in metals, this and similar art, teach the use of lightreflection or emission to increase the visibility and/or attractivenessof lures. For example, Causey in U.S. Pat. No. 4,936,042 teaches the useof a highly reflective metal strip that is intended to catch theattention of fish. Numerous other art discloses the use of surfacereflectivity to attract game fish, including the use of dimples,sequins, laser etching and other surface modifications to alter thenature of the reflection. U.S. Pat. No. 4,862,631 teaches the use ofsmall glass spheres in a fishing lure coating in order to increase itsreflectiveness. Additional prior art employs the use of artificialsources of light, including light emitting diodes or incandescent lightbulbs to make the lure more visible to fish (see, for example, U.S. Pat.No. 4,227,331 by Ursrey).

This art teaches the application of non-decoy artificial lure feature ofconspicuousness and does not teach increasing realism of decoy lures.This art purports to teach that UV reflective coatings can make luresmore visible to fish—even though many metallic lures are already highlyUV reflective. Jeckle also teaches the application of UV reflectivecoatings to live bait fish though research by the inventors and othershas shown that many fish, including many bait fish, already possess UVreflecting surfaces.

This art does not teach the reflective properties of animals mimicked bydecoys or decoy lures in the full spectrum visible other animals,including ultraviolet light. This art also does not teach how todetermine the natural UV reflection of bait fish, other game animals, ornatural objects. To date, there is no art known to the inventors thatteaches a decoy or decoy lure that possesses the natural UV reflectivelevels and patterning of the animal it is designed to mimic. What isneeded is a decoy or decoy lure with the natural UV reflective level andpatterning of the animal it is intended to mimic. Such a decoy or decoylure would possess increased realism, and therefore greatereffectiveness as a decoy or decoy lure. It is to this need and advantagethat the present invention is intended.

It is well known by those skilled in the art of paint formulation thatvirtually all paint, with the exception of some deep colors, uses UVabsorbing titanium dioxide as the primary lightening/whitening pigmentand as such, is already inherently UV absorbing. The common form ofRutile titanium dioxide (TiO2) is completely UV absorbing and the lesscommon form of Anatase TiO2 possesses only a trace of UV reflection inthe wavelengths nearest human-visible light and as such, neither form ofTiO2 is suitable to produce UV reflective coatings. Because of this wellknown property of TiO2, the inventors do not understand why Jeckleclaims TiO2 as a primary mineral pigment in his UV reflective coating.

While many man-made objects, especially conventional paints, absorb UVlight, recent research has shown that many natural objects as well asanimals can reflect UV light. This reflection and its patterning, whilenot visible to humans, can be seen through the use of ultravioletphotography and videography, in which UV light is converted to colors ormonochrome images that can be perceived by humans.

A study by Eaton and Lanyon (“The ubiquity of avian ultraviolet plumagereflectance” published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society ofLondon—Biological Sciences in 2003), measured the UV reflection ofhundreds of bird feather patches of different colors using UV-Visiblespectrophotometry. This study showed that some colors such as whitetypically exhibited some level of UV reflection but the amount ofreflection varied significantly between species. This study, the mostcomprehensive attempt to date to classify the UV reflectance of birds,did not include the grays, tans, and other light earth tones typicallyfound in many game birds, nor did it investigate the overall pattern ofUV reflection for any bird. Other studies have shown that some speciesof birds have black feathers with significant UV reflection while otherblack feathers have virtually no UV reflection. Feathers that appearwhite to humans can possess UV reflection from low to moderate to highdepending on the species of bird and the location of the feather on thebird. Often male/female pairs of bird species that appear to beidentical to humans actually have differing UV reflectancecharacteristics, making the color difference between the sexes veryobvious to birds.

Taken in its entirety, the present knowledge of UV reflectance in birdplumage, fish scales, fur, or other animal surface cannot be usedsuccessfully to predict the amount of UV reflection of an animal basedon the human-visible color of the surfaces of the animal.

While is has been established that many game animals can see UVlight—although many manufacturers are unaware of it, and those that areaware of it have taught away from the present invention—and it has beenestablished that many animals and natural objects possess UV reflection,it has not been taught by any art, nor is it obvious, what the specificUV reflection of any or all surfaces (such as plumage, scales, skin orfur) of species of bait fish and game or prey animals mimicked by decoysor decoy lures is and how this knowledge, were it to be obtained, can beproperly exploited to improve the performance of decoys and decoy lures.

Jeckle acknowledges this lack of knowledge within the art, stating in20060117637 that “It is impractical, if not impossible to preciselyduplicate the natural reflectance of UV light off the feathers of birdsbecause the reflectance and color hues are in the UV range that humanscannot perceive. Without being able to perceive the reflectance, anyattempt of realistically mimicking the reflection is guesswork.” Jeckleconcludes that “The solution to this problem is to diminish thereflectance of ultraviolet light while maintaining a presumptivelynatural appearance in the visible spectrum.”

It is clear that the UV reflectance levels and patterning of gameanimals and natural objects such as foliage and a means to reproducethat reflectance on decoys and other hunting products is not known.Jeckel and others teach that because of this lack of knowledge, the onlyoption is to eliminate UV reflection from hunting decoys and otherobjects viewed by birds and mammals. Jeckel in 20060121166 and othersalso teach that, presumable from this same lack of knowledge, the UVreflection is to be maximized on fishing lures.

Various materials are used to make decoys and decoys lures includingwood, metals, plastics, polymer foams, woven and non-woven fabrics andcombinations of these and other materials. Several methods can be usedto impart surface characteristics including paint, molded-in colors andtextures, textured foils, polished or stamped metals and other methods.To provide human-visible color for the intended species, several methodscan be used. One method is to use the inherent color of the material, asis sometimes the case with fabrics and foams. Another method is toincorporate color pigments directly into the material using colorcompounding methods common in the plastics industry. The most commonmethod is to apply a surface coating, typically an ink or paint that isformulated to have the desired human-visible color. Often, a combinationof these methods is used.

For the production of decoy lures, a common method include the use offoils textured to look like scales to match the silvery surface of thesides of bait fish with painted dark tops and painted white or lightcolored bellies. This pattern (dark on top, silvery sided, and light onbottom/belly) is extremely common for many decoy lures and is oftenaugmented with distinctive patterning such as stripes or vividly coloredtops. This pattern (dark on top, silvery sided, and light onbottom/belly) is consistently seen on many bait fish as it is the baitfish's natural camouflage. Another common derivative of the decoy lurepatterning is the use of printing methods to impart life-like featureson the lure. Decoy lures are also commonly produced with plasticspossessing translucent or iridescent properties to mimic the silverytranslucence of some bait fish. While it has been pointed out by theinventors that many metals on lures are inherently UV reflective, thisis not taught in the art as desirable for a decoy lure. Moreimportantly, an extremely common feature of decoy lures is white orlight colored (via painted, printed, or molded-in color) bellies. Thislight colored or white surface is intended to mimic the diffuselyreflective light colored bellies of prey animals such as bait fish.Because metals reflect in a specular or angle-dependant manner, they donot easily mimic the highly diffuse or non-angle-dependant reflectiveproperties of white, and as such, metals make poor materials to mimicthe white or light colored bellies of bait fish. To properly mimic thisdiffusely reflective light underbelly, decoy lures typically use whiteor light colored paint, inks, or molded-in colored plastics. All ofthese material choices will use TiO2 as the whitener and as such, willbe UV absorbing. The inventors have determined (using methodsestablished in U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 11/711,409 and11/711,410, to which this application is a continuation in part) thatmany bait fish bellies are highly diffusely UV reflective, and as such,current lures will not match the natural appearance of bait fish forgame fish possessing UV sensitivity. Current science indicates thatperhaps two-thirds of freshwater fish and one half of marine fishpossess UV sensitivity. What is needed is a decoy lure that matches thespectral reflectance of the prey animal it is designed to mimic in thefull visual spectrum, including ultraviolet, of the game fish the decoylure is intended to catch. It is to this need that the present inventionis intended.

A search of the prior art will show patents and other documents thatdiscuss the use of materials that are sensitive to or resistant to UVlight, but these prior art references do not teach the measurement anduse of the reflection of UV light. Some references refer to “UVresistance”, which involves the use of materials and coatings to preventdamage such as yellowing due to the effects of UV light. UV-resistantmaterials are typically UV absorbing and therefore can not be used tomimic the UV reflectance patterns of animals or objects. Otherreferences discuss the use of UV inks on their products. UV inks arespecial inks which can be cured under the presence of high-intensity UVlight, but they are not intended to reflect UV light and are typicallynot UV reflective. Other references describe the use of UV forphosphorescence and fluorescence, but this is not UV reflectance butrather UV energy used to “charge” the glow effects of phosphorescenceand fluorescence.

Regardless of how artificial color is incorporated, it is formulated forthe intended species or natural object based on human color perception,without accounting for the differences between human and animal colorvision. Industrially, color matching is often done using the L-a-bscale, which assigns each color a point in the three dimensional spacedefined by three axes: L (lightness), a (magenta to green) and b (blueto yellow). This system is based on the peak sensitivity of the cones ofthe human eye and is therefore an inadequate method for matching colorsas perceived by animals.

Ultraviolet-visible (UV-Vis) reflectance spectroscopy is an analyticalmethod of measuring the reflection of light from a surface over a rangeof wavelengths. Instruments used for this measurement shine light at anobject and measure the intensity of the reflected light. By changing thewavelength of the incident light, a graph of the intensity of reflectedlight versus wavelength can be developed. Using this method to assistthe matching of colors is not dependant on the color vision of humansand therefore avoids the inadequacies of using human vision (and methodsdependant or build around human vision such as traditional L-a-bmethods) for matching colors for animal vision systems.

While many artificial or “man-made” objects are UV-absorbing, somematerials, including some fabrics and polymer foams which are naturallywhite in color, reflect UV light. However, this UV reflection does notmatch that of any specific animal species and may be either more or lessreflective at a particular wavelength. Other materials which appearwhite to humans are UV fluorescent, which means they absorb UVwavelengths and emit light at human-visible longer wavelengths. This iswhy some fabrics appear extra-bright under a UV emitting black light.This effect alters the color of the object in a way that can beperceived by some animals.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,691,464 by Rudolph describes a flexible fabric coveringwhich can be placed over a decoy in an attempt to enhance the life-likeaccuracy of the decoy. Rudolph describes the use of reflective panelsplaced in strategic locations on the fabric covering in an attempt tomatch the iridescence of the brightly colored secondary feathers of abird. Iridescence is created by manipulating the surface material suchthat the color of the surface appears to shift depending on the angle bywhich the surface is observed. Iridescence does not affect the UVcharacteristics of the decoy, and the use of a reflective panel on adecoy covering does not accurately mimic the reflective characteristicsof a decoy as seen by an animal. Rudolph does not teach the use of UVreflective characteristics to mimic those of an animal.

The UV reflection properties of minerals have been measured and it isknown, by those skilled in the art, which pigments and fillers may beused to achieve ultraviolet light reflection. Matching the UVreflectance of paint to snow has been utilized in military camouflage byLindquist et. al. in U.S. Pat. No. 3,300,325 using barium sulphate,calcium carbonate and/or antimony trioxide.

To achieve maximized appearance realism, and therefore improvedperformance, what is needed is a decoy or decoy lure that is designed tomatch the coloration and/or patterning in the entire light reflectancespectrum of the vision system of the animal which it is intended tomimic. To develop decoys or decoy lures that match the UV reflection ofthe animal surface the decoy or decoy lure is mimicking requires fillingthe knowledge gap of the UV reflection signatures of those surfaces, andincorporating said reflection into the manufacture of the decoy or decoylure. To determine those UV signatures requires refining a method todetermine said signatures. When the UV signatures are known, the nextstep needed is to synthesize existing art in materials sciences (forexample, paint color matching in the visible wavelengths) with what isknown about the UV reflection of materials. This effort must be combinedwith the study of the UV reflection of candidate materials whose UVreflection is not known. This gained knowledge and newly developedmethods must then be successfully applied to decoys or decoy lures.

SUMMARY OF INVENTION

In one aspect of the invention, the outer surface of an animal decoy ismodified to match the actual reflectance of the animal in thewavelengths of light which are visible to the animal.

In another aspect of the invention, portions of the outer surface of ananimal decoy are modified to possess bright UV reflectance where whiteareas exist on the corresponding areas of the animal, and moderate UVreflectance where gray or tan areas exist on the corresponding areas ofthe animal.

In another aspect of the invention, the reflective characteristics of ananimal are measured using techniques such as UV imaging in order tocreate a map showing the areas of low, medium, and high ultravioletreflectance on the outer surface of the animal.

In another aspect of the invention, the reflective characteristics ofvarious portions of the outer surface of an animal are measured usingtechniques such as UV-Visible spectroscopy to create line graphsrepresenting the percent reflectance for each wavelength of light inboth the ultraviolet spectrum of sunlight (300 to 400 nm) and thehuman-visible (400 to 700 nm) spectrums.

In another aspect of the invention, the measured reflectivecharacteristics of an animal are used to formulate coatings such aspaints which match the UV-Visible line graphs for that animal, and whichcan be used to create a model or decoy of the animal.

In another aspect of the invention, the outer surface of an animal decoyis modified to match the actual reflectance of the animal in thewavelengths of light which are visible to the animal.

In still another aspect of the invention, portions of the outer surfaceof a decoy lure are modified to possess bright UV reflectance wherewhite or light colored scales exist on a bait fish and moderate UVreflectance where silvery, light brown, tan, or other non-dark andnon-white colored scales exist on a bait fish or surfaces exist on ananimal.

These aspects and others are achieved by the present invention, which isdescribed in detail in the following specification and accompanyingdrawings which form a part hereof.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 shows the typical ultraviolet reflectivity patterns of two typesof waterfowl.

FIG. 2 shows the ultraviolet reflectance curves given by the variousbody parts of typical waterfowl and baitfish compared against theultraviolet reflectance curves given by typical decoy and decoy lurecoatings and materials found in the prior art.

FIG. 3 illustrates an ultraviolet imaging system used to determine thepatterns and relative intensity of the UV reflecting area of an animal.

FIG. 4 illustrates a laboratory set up using a UV-Vis spectrophotometerto determine the quantitative reflectance curve across the spectrum ofthe animal vision system.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart of the process of creating animal decoysexhibiting realistic UV reflections.

FIG. 6 shows a common ultraviolet reflectivity pattern of an exampleminnow bait fish.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

It must be understood that, just as the human-visible colors present onan animal vary greatly over the surface of that animal, the ultraviolet(UV) light reflected from the surface of that animal can also varygreatly. A human-visible color such as the green found on the head of adrake mallard duck is simply a set of reflected wavelengths of lightthat falls within the spectrum of light visible to humans; specifically,it is wavelengths of light that humans perceive as the color green (forillustration purposes only we ignore the iridescent “angle-dependant”nature of these feathers). Depending on the exact wavelength andintensity of the reflected light, the color “green” may range inappearance from blue-green to yellow-green. Similarly, the amount of UVlight, as well as the specific wavelengths of UV light, reflected fromthe surface of an animal can vary greatly, creating different “colors”of UV light. Although these UV colors are not visible to humans, theyare visible to many animals, and should be accounted for when creatingrealistic models or decoys of those animals. That is the intent of thepresent invention.

Throughout this specification and in the claims, the terms “matches” or“substantially matches” and derivations thereof are used to describe towhat degree the surface reflection patterns of the decoy and decoy lurescreated through the employment of this invention will appear natural tothe animals for which they are intended to deceive. It is possible, forexample, for someone to increase the total amount of ultraviolet lightreflected from a decoy or decoy lure by covering it with anultraviolet-reflecting material such as Tyvek for bird decoys orembossed foils for decoy lures. While there is an overall increase inthe amount of ultraviolet light reflected from such a decoy, this decoywill not “substantially match” the varied surface refection pattern of areal animal or object, and will not appear realistic to the targetanimal. The terms “matches” and “substantially matches” and derivationsthereof, as used in this specification, are used to describe decoys anddecoy lures with surface reflectance patterns which will appearrealistic to the target animal, and which fall within the range ofultraviolet wavelengths seen in nature for the corresponding portions ofthe actual target animal or object being mimicked.

FIG. 1 illustrates the UV reflectance patterns of two differentwaterfowl. Although waterfowl are used as examples herein, it should beunderstood that any type of animal can be used with similar results.FIG. 1 shows areas of high UV reflectance 10, areas of medium UVreflectance 20, and areas of little or no UV reflectance 30 in thepatterns in which they would typically appear on a drake Mallard duck ora Canada goose. Although the present invention shows areas of high UVreflectance 10 are often seen associated with areas of white or lighthuman-visible colors on the waterfowl, studies have shown that this isoften not the case for all white colored animals. Similar studies haveshown that areas of black can be associated with significant UVreflectance, and areas of white can have very little UV reflectance.White feathers and many other white surfaces on animals (for examplesome white fish scales) often possess UV reflection of 50 to 70% (acommon range of waterfowl white feathers and some white fish scales) butcould be as high as 90% and as low as 15%. These percentages representaverages of the reflectance across the UV wavelengths visible to thetargeted animal. Similarly, non-white colors have ranges typical foreach species. These percentages can be determined using UV-Visiblereflectance curves. The UV-Visible reflectance curves of some commondecoy and decoy lure colors are shown in FIG. 2.

FIG. 2 illustrates the UV-Visible reflectance curves of example animalsas compared to materials found in the prior art used for coating decoysor decoy lures. The visual spectrum of humans 60 and the visual spectrumtypical of birds, many fish and other animals 61 are indicated along thebottom access of the line graph. The reflectance curves of severalmaterials taught in the prior art, including white 40, light tan 41, andtan 42, are shown. Each of the materials 40, 41, and 42 demonstratesvery little reflectance in the wavelengths of ultraviolet light between300 and 400 nanometers. The reflectance curves of a Snow goose body andwing 50, a Canada goose cheek patch 52, a Canada goose breast 54 and atypical white area on a bait fish such as a Minnow 97 are also shown.The reflective characteristics of animal components 50, 52, 54, and 97cannot adequately be implemented using materials 40, 41, and 42. Animalswhich can see in the visual spectrum of birds and many fish 61 will seematerials 40, 41, and 42 as significantly different colors than animalcomponents 50, 52, 54, and 97 even though materials 40, 41, and 42 willappear as close matches in the human visible spectrum 60. The range ofUV wavelengths within the visual spectrum of animals 61, can vary fromspecies to species. This range could be as wide as 300 to 400 nm but ismore commonly about 320 to 400 nm. This effective visible UV range canbe about 350 to 400 nm for some species such as many waterfowl or asnarrow as about 380 to 400 nm.

The present invention describes a method of mapping the reflectancecharacteristics of the outer surface of an animal. Refer now to FIG. 3and FIG. 4. FIG. 3 illustrates a test set-up which uses UV imaging orsimilar techniques to determine areas of low, medium, and highreflectance on the outer surface of the animal. The animal subject 70 isplaced in front of a UV imaging camera 74. Light sources 72 emitultraviolet light onto the animal subject 70, and the reflected UV lightis detected by the UV imaging camera 74. A monochrome image 78, showingareas of high UV reflectance as bright areas, moderate UV reflectance asshades of gray and no UV reflectance as dark areas, is displayed on acomputer display 76. The data from the image 78 is interpreted andrecorded to show a map of the UV reflection pattern like that shown inFIG. 1.

FIG. 4 illustrates an additional step in which the animal subject 70 ismapped with a UV-Vis spectrophotometer 80 to determine the quantitativereflectance curves 84 across the spectrum of the animal vision system.Surface measurements are taken from whole or partial samples 82 fromcarcasses or other natural samples. A reflectance curve 84 is generatedin this manner for each different sample 82. Example reflectance curves84 can be seen in greater detail for the animal components 50, 52, 54and 97 on FIG. 2.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart of the process of creating animal decoysexhibiting realistic UV reflections. In Step 90, a UV reflectancesurface map is created for the animal subject 70. This is done by the UVimaging process previously described herein in FIG. 3. In Step 91, UVreflectance curves 84 are created for various samples 82 of an animalcarcass. This is done by the UV-Vis process previously described hereinin FIG. 4. The UV image 78 and reflectance curves 84 are analyzed tocreate specific formulations of paint or other surface coveringmaterial, as shown in Step 92. In Step 93, the UV-reflective paint ormaterial is applied to the outer surface of an animal decoy, or thedecoy itself is composed of said materials, to create a model of theanimal subject 70 that appears visually realistic to the animal in theanimal's visual spectrum.

FIG. 6 illustrates the UV general reflectance patterns of common baitfish minnows such as flathead, shiners, suckers and many other commonbait fish. The dark top 94 is typically brown, tan, and black patternsand contains a low level of UV reflection, typically less than 20%. Thesilvery sides 95 possess bright specular UV reflectance, as much as 80%or higher at certain angles. The belly 96 possess bright diffuse UVreflectance from 15-80%. Current lures attempt to achieve this diffusereflectance with conventional paints and as such are UV-absorbing,typically about 90% UV absorbing (or more) or only 10% reflecting (orless) in the UV wavelengths. The present invention matches the diffuseUV reflection of animals such as bait fish which is typically 15% to 80%UV in the areas described in FIG. 6.

While it is apparent that some of the current art inadvertently oftenachieves some specular (non-diffuse) UV reflection of the sides 95 of abait fish with the use of embossed or otherwise textured metal foils, itis also apparent the diffusely reflecting surface is achieved withpaint, coatings, printing inks, or molded-in colored surfaces which aretypically plastic, and as such will be UV-absorbing as said surfacesemploy TiO2 to achieve diffuse reflectance of white and light colors.

In the preferred embodiment, one or more surfaces of a decoy or decoylure are coated or coloration is molded-in to achieve diffuse UVreflection on those surfaces where diffuse UV reflection is present inthe animal to be mimicked. This diffuse reflection is typically between15 to 80% UV reflecting in the wavelengths from 320 nm to 400 nm withthe preferred embodiment being 30% to 70% for human-visible white (andother light colors and some bright colors) but could be as low as 12%and as high as 90%.

In another embodiment, the underside or belly areas of a decoy lure arepainted with diffusely reflecting UV paint which is human-visible white,or light-colored, or bright-colored but it will become apparent thatthis pattern of UV reflection applies to certain bait fish, and otheranimals to be mimicked by decoys or decoy lures could have differentdiffusely UV-reflective areas.

The methods used to measure this UV reflectance and subsequently todevelop coatings or molded-in colors are established in U.S. patentapplication Ser. Nos. 11/711,409 and 11/711,410, to which thisapplication is a continuation in part. The ability to discriminate andmeasure diffuse versus specular reflectance is a common attribute ofUV/Vis spectrophotometers and understood by those skilled in the art.

Having described the preferred embodiment and other example embodiments,it will become apparent that various modifications can be made withoutdeparting from the scope of the invention as defined in the accompanyingclaims. In particular, any animal, plant, seeds, or even an object, canbe used as a decoy or decoy lure if it aids in the deception of ananimal. The common waterfowl and bait fish minnow discussed directlyherein are intended as examples only and the teachings of thisapplication could be applied to any object intended to deceive or lurean animal. In addition, methods of measuring the UV reflectance of ananimal or object other than those discussed herein may be used toachieve the same or similar results. Using the methods described, itwill also become apparent that certain animals may have cryptic UVreflecting surfaces that do not correspond to bright human visiblecolors. It is obvious that many animals vary in human-visible appearancebetween male and female; using the methods described, it will becomeapparent that game animals and bait fish may possess human-invisibleappearance differences that could be mimicked to make decoys or decoylures more effective.

1. A fishing lure with a surface reflection which substantially matchesthe spectral reflectance pattern of the animal that it is designed tomimic in the ultraviolet wavelengths.
 2. The fishing lure of claim 1,wherein only certain areas of the lure have a surface reflection whichsubstantially matches the spectral reflectance pattern of the animalthat it is designed to mimic.
 3. The fishing lure of claim 1 whereinsaid surface reflectance pattern is achieved with a diffuseultraviolet-reflecting surface which reflects at least 15% ofultraviolet light.
 4. A fishing lure resembling an animal where one ormore portions of the surface of the lure are diffuseultraviolet-reflecting areas which correspond in location to the naturalultraviolet-reflecting areas of the animal to be mimicked by the lure.5. The fishing lure of claim 4 where the animal is a fish and the one ormore portions of the surface of the lure are the underside of the lure,corresponding to the belly area of a fish.
 6. The fishing lure of claim4 wherein said diffuse ultraviolet-reflecting surface areas of the lurereflect at least 15% of ultraviolet light.
 7. The fishing lure of claim4 wherein said ultraviolet-reflecting areas of the lure have a surfacereflection which substantially matches the spectral reflectance patternof the areas of the animal they are designed to mimic.
 8. A fishing lurecoating which reflects at least 15% of ultraviolet light and whichmatches the ultraviolet reflection of a surface of the animal to bemimicked by the lure coating.